Age Dispute

Many scientists assert that materialistic explanations of galaxy formation are unsupportable and counter evidence.[2][3][4][5][6] In 1988, fifty cosmologists attended a conference which focused on galaxy formation. After summarizing the observational data, two of the most respected scientists estimated the probability that any existing theory on galaxy formation is correct was about 1 out of 100.[7] In 1999, J. Bland-Hawthorn wrote in the science journal Nature the following:

"In 1977, Stephen Weinberg observed that "the theory of the formation of galaxies is one of the great outstanding problems of astrophysics, a problem that today seems far from solution". Although the past two decades have seen considerable progress, many questions remain." [8]

In 2001, Cristina Chiappini wrote regarding the Milky Way galaxy the following:

. . . it is an elegant structure that shows both order and complexity. . . . The end product is especially remarkable in the light of what is believed to be the starting point: nebulous blobs of gas. How the universe made the Milky Way from such simple beginnings is not altogether clear. - Cristina Chiappini, "The Formation and Evolution of the Milky Way," American Scientist (vol. 89, Nov./Dec. 2001), p. 506.[9]

A strange cartoon graced the cover of Science News last fall (10/08/2005) that serves as a symbol for a whole class of problems for evolutionary astronomers. It showed a star-shaped old man in a stellar maternity ward. With its title, "Crisis in the Cosmos? Galaxy-formation theory is in peril," the article exposed a running theme in astronomy: as far back as we look, stars and galaxies appear mature.

"Imagine peering into a nursery and seeing, among the cooing babies, a few that look like grown men," Ron Cowen quipped. "That's the startling situation that astronomers have stumbled upon as they've looked deep into space and thus back to a time when newborn galaxies filled the cosmos."....

These findings corroborate a January 8, 2002, NASA press release that was considered astonishing at the time: based on Hubble surveys, "the grand finale came first" in stellar and galactic evolution. As far back as telescopes look, they see mature creation, not evolution.[10]

Young earth creationists also cite the following:

“In its simplest form, the big bang scenario doesn’t look like a good way to make galaxies. It allows too little time for the force of gravity by itself to gather ordinary matter—neutrons, protons and electrons—into the patterns of galaxies seen today. Yet the theory survives for want of a better idea.” Ivars Peterson, Science News, "Seeding the universe: how did matter assemble itself into the giant filaments, clusters, bubbles and walls of galaxies that now fill the universe?" March 24, 1990, p. 184.[11][12]

“It [the Great Wall, composed of tens of thousands of galaxies] is far too large and too massive to have formed by the mutual gravitational attraction of its member galaxies.” M. Mitchell Waldrop, “Astronomers Go Up Against the Great Wall,” Science, Vol. 246, 17 November 1989, p. 885. (See also Margaret J. Geller and John P. Huchra, “Mapping the Universe,” Science, Vol. 246, 17 November 1989, pp. 897–903).[13]